Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

neowin.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 225 posts

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#121

Post by delusional »

charles_f wrote: post #84

Does Hyundai consider this as a patch though? I'm wondering if the dealership would present you the bill with a straight face, is that presented as a "more secure" system, or an "additional anti theft device"?

From the wording of the press release it sounds like they view it as an optional add-on specifically for UK customers who want additional security:

Recently, evolving security threats, including the use of unauthorised electronic devices to bypass vehicle locking systems have become more prevalent in the UK. This is an industry-wide issue and Hyundai is providing appropriate responses in line with industry practices.

As part of the Company’s commitment to supporting our customers, we are able to offer a subsidised software and hardware upgrade for a customer contribution of £49.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#122

Post by mft_ »

Hmmm, so recently: ̶ ̶H̶y̶u̶n̶d̶a̶i̶ ̶K̶i̶a̶ ̶V̶o̶l̶k̶s̶w̶a̶g̶e̶n̶ ̶

At this rate, I'll be back to Tesla for any future EV purchase. (Noting that Tesla second-hand prices in Europe seem to have taken a dive over the past while, presumably partly thanks to Elon's shenanighans?)

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#123

Post by robinsonb5 »

throwaway290 wrote: post #112
florbnit wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pay me more to fix it, not my problem that your requests is failing. If you are employed in a position where there is a defect in the product then you are already being paid. Imagine going to a restaurant and you get an uncooked frozen steak, and when you tell the waiter they tell you that since the cook will need to spend more time on it you now have to pay extra.

Look at the price of the car compared to other electric SUVs. This is a mcdonalds type of situation. not a restaurant where you can request to cook a rare steak a bit more and not get charged extra

Even in McDonalds if what they give you is defective they will replace it without question once you bring it to their attention.

If it turned out the door locks on the car were defective you'd expect them to be replaced under warranty. If the warranty had expired the situation would, admittedly, be a bit murkier - but you could still make a case that since the locks had always been faulty they'd be the manufacturer's responsibility.

Someone I used to work with had a car a few years ago on which the battery would mysteriously drain for no obvious reason. It turned out to be a defect in the infotainment system's firmware - and he was furious that he was expected to pay for the firmware update to fix it. (The car was long out of warranty, though.)

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#124

Post by nsteel »

sokoloff wrote: post #118
nsteel wrote: post #111

I don't know about the Hyundai Ioniq, but the Kia Niro has no way to permanently disable keyless entry, which would be the obvious, super easy s/w fix. You can disable it each time you lock your car by holding extra buttons on the fob for a few secs, but it's auto re-enabled next time you unlock. It's everything you need to know before you make your smart decision not to buy a Kia. Cheap(er) for a reason. But looks f…

> Having terrible security just helps sales! Until it’s banned by regulators or made uninsurable…

We are not scared of regulation in the UK. And this car has existed, in the UK, with this flaw, for over 6 years. Quite clearly nobody is interested in doing either of those things you suggest.

Plus the UK is about to reintroduce financial incentives for private EV purchase, they want to push sales, not clamp down on crap products.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#125

Post by ponector »

mirzap wrote: post #76
jjani wrote: post #22

They're swapping out hardware, which is why they're asking money for this to compensate the labor costs. Not saying this justifies it, but the title is misleading.

It doesn't matter. If a customer buys faulty hardware, it's the seller's responsibility to replace it with working hardware. If the breaks had a manufacturing defect, you wouldn't expect the customer to pay for the replacement.

There is nothing faulty in the hardware, why they should replace it?

Following the same logic: old phones, even iphones can be hacked. Should manufacturers replace the hardware?

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#126

Post by mijoharas »

So, can people tell me what cars with keyless entry systems aren't susceptible to these attacks?

I'm somewhat wary of any of them, but it seems like it's a feature of a lot of new cars, and I can't tell what is "safe" to buy. It was a simple signal amplification thing wasn't it?

Does anyone know if BYD cars suffer from it for example?

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#127

Post by reactordev »

ponector wrote: post #125
mirzap wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter. If a customer buys faulty hardware, it's the seller's responsibility to replace it with working hardware. If the breaks had a manufacturing defect, you wouldn't expect the customer to pay for the replacement.

There is nothing faulty in the hardware, why they should replace it? Following the same logic: old phones, even iphones can be hacked. Should manufacturers replace the hardware?

In my opinion, yes, yes they should. If you can’t guarantee security of your device, and you don’t want to update the software, then you’ll need to upgrade the hardware. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have that under a warranty.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#128

Post by reactordev »

robinsonb5 wrote: post #123
throwaway290 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the price of the car compared to other electric SUVs. This is a mcdonalds type of situation. not a restaurant where you can request to cook a rare steak a bit more and not get charged extra

Even in McDonalds if what they give you is defective they will replace it without question once you bring it to their attention. If it turned out the door locks on the car were defective you'd expect them to be replaced under warranty. If the warranty had expired the situation would, admittedly, be a bit murkier - but you could still make a case that since the locks had always been faulty they'd be the manufacturer's…

[flagged]

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#129

Post by Shorel »

petronic wrote: post #42

“Gameboy-like device” - are they referring to Flipper Zeros with the firmware to exploit RF rolling codes? https://www.rtl-sdr.com/flipperzero-darkweb-firmware-bypasse...

No, some dedicated hardware device, about five years old, that looks like a Game Boy.

The flipper firmware is only about six months old, and it is still not as convenient and distributed.

The actual firmware exploit is the same idea.

Re: Hyundai wants loniq 5 customers to pay for cybersecurity patch in baffling move

#130

Post by TheDong »

reactordev wrote: post #127
ponector wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing faulty in the hardware, why they should replace it? Following the same logic: old phones, even iphones can be hacked. Should manufacturers replace the hardware?

In my opinion, yes, yes they should. If you can’t guarantee security of your device, and you don’t want to update the software, then you’ll need to upgrade the hardware. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have that under a warranty.

> I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have that under a warranty.

The warranty is not that long, and I think the parent comment is talking about 6+ year old iphones that are definitely out of warranty.

If those should get replaced, surely that means each person buys one iPhone in their life, and then just gets free replacements forever, leading to the initial cost of the phone having to go up a lot to account for that.

Post reply on HN